Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Food Crisis Needs Aid on Scale of Tsunami to Avert Famine
Pressure for international action to combat the "silent tsunami" of the global food crisis intensified amid warnings that spiraling prices meant more than 100 million people could be plunged into hunger.
A Downing Street food summit called by Gordon Brown heard calls for the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to bring forward aid payments to countries worst hit as the first step towards a co-ordinated action by the G8 industrialised nations to tackle the worst food crisis for a generation.
Britain announced a £455m aid package, including £30m to the World Food Programme (WFP) and funding for research into food production methods.
The Government rowed back from its support for biofuels, announcing a review of the technology and warning that ministers would press for cuts in European biofuel targets if they are found to hit food prices.
Mr Brown said: "We need to look closely at the impact of biofuels on food prices and the environment." The European Commission also pledged nearly £100m to help the worst-hit regions. Estimates suggest that 25,000 people are dying daily from hunger, a crisis exacerbated by food prices that have hit their highest level since 1945.
Josette Sheeran, the executive director of the WFP, warned that food prices had pushed 100 million people into hunger and likened the crisis to the giant Indian Ocean tsunami that killed 250,000 people and left 10 million destitute. She said: "This is the new face of hunger - the millions of people who were not in the urgent hunger category six months ago but now are."
She called for an aid effort similar to the £6bn given to help victims of the 2004 tsunami.
The Prime Minister said that food shortages represented a crisis on a par with the global turmoil in the financial markets, and threatened the stability of nations. There have been food riots on Haiti and unrest in a string of countries including Egypt, Mozambique, Senegal and Indonesia.
Leaders in South America have also warned about the impact of biofuel production on food supply.
Mr Brown said that global problems of food supply were contributing to spiralling prices on British high streets. He said: "Hunger is a moral challenge to each one of us as global citizens, but it is also a threat to the political and economic stability of poor nations around the world. Riots now threaten democratically elected governments."
At Strasbourg, Louis Michel, the European commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, told MEPs that the growing cost of basic food is "a worldwide humanitarian disaster in the making".
A report for the international affairs think-tank Chatham House said that a revolution in agriculture was needed to cope with a projected 50 per cent increase in the demand for food by 2030.
The report's author, Dr Alex Evans, said: "While the current focus on humanitarian aid is welcome, we need to be thinking now about the long term too - especially how to grow food supply and make sure that the process benefits rural poor people. What we're seeing now is the start of a multi-decade challenge."
Vicky Hird, Friends of the Earth food campaigner, said: "Food production must be revolutionised to prevent a global catastrophe. This means developing food and trade policies that put people and the planet first and abandoning damaging false solutions such as biofuels and GM."
© 2008 The Independent

30 Comments so far
Show AllThe technological challenge to produce enough food is the easy part and won't solve the problem as long as food, energy and real estate continue to be speculative commodities in a deregulated environment.
During the past decade the exploitation of deregulated (electrical) power, real estate finance and now fuel and food have had the same result: extreme financial enrichment of 3% of the population at the expense of the other 97%.
Unless the financial industry is re-regulated and the CPI and other indexes are derived from the real rate of inflation, rather than the phoney figures we have been seeing for the past quarter century, the food crisis will only get worse. Also, corporate welfare for the biofuel industry needs to be terminated at the same time.
The food crisis needs aid and a revolution. Nutrition, housing, health care, education, and dignified work are human rights. Charity and aid will never end global hunger. Yes, it is important to contribute to Oxfam or the UN Food Program, but it is critically important to end the madness of corporate greed and to become active in anti-capitalist revolutionary politics.
The food shortage/famine/crisis is part of the plan. It is INTENDED to happen ... that way, whatever is remaining of the earth's resources belong to the corporate wealthy elite. We hoi polloi are meant to die - one way or another. Those young, poor left will be serfs for the elite.
"If you control the oil you control the country; if you control food, you control the population." Henry Kissinger
Repeat after me: Overpopulation. Overpopulation. Overpopulation. Overpopulation....
Geddit now?
Hummm...how about Greed, Greed, Greed. The article says that FOOD PRICES have caused a problem of availability. There is enough food. The means of production is being taken over by corporations that manipulate availability.
"Keeping food costs low has been one of the great economic achievements of the last century."
And we all know how the illegal Cheney/Bush administration feels about anything "good" done in the last century...
Funny how not a single article on the "food crisis" mentions Monsanto, or their control over 80% of "biofuel" transgenic mutant corn (which jumped from $2.50 a bushel to $6 even though humans have rejected it,) transgenic mutant soy, and transgenic mutant canola (rapeseed.)
Not that said illegal administration would ever f**k over the entire world if it meant mega-profits for "the base"...
"Keeping food costs low has been one of the great economic achievements of the last century."
One of the biggest reasons this is the case is because ecological information (like pollution, absolute scarcity, over consumption) are absent both the pricing mechanism and national indices. It's a failure of orthodox economics and it will create a bigger problem as the world's population and consumption continue to grow. The amount of resources on the planet are finite, they have a limit, and our economic system and the people who pop out as many babies as possible are not compatible with that fact.
I agree that these people should be helped with aid, but the aid does not fundamentally solve the problem. Small farmers in the developing world (who would use far less fuel costs than their highly subsidized corporate agriculture giants in the industrialized countries) have been decimated by the IMF and similar institutions advice and strong handing. Economic growth itself is a problem, as I said above, the amount of resources is finite and the economic system and many people's mentality doesn't account for that. A good portion, and an increasing amount, of the food crops are now going towards energy usage. Another issue is the consumption of meat.
The answer to this is to radically change the economic system and for that the left needs to go to war with the out of touch and outdated economics departments across the country. As the ecological economist Herman Daly (who's book "Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development" deals with these very subjects) said when asked about this, "And the economists at the World Bank all went to seminary and learned their theology and they're trying to apply that theology in the world to do good. Well I think they learned bad theology. I think the seminaries were teaching bad theology and that takes us back to the first point about the intellectual high ground in economics. All economists who work at the World Bank, whether they're from Africa or California, I mean they got their degrees from Harvard, MIT, Oxford, McGill, you know all these top-rate universities across the world, which all teach pretty much the same thing."
We need people to locally control their economies and to trade with other countries what they can't produce domestically, on their own terms, not having failed policies forced upon them by countries like the US and Western Europe because it's in the US and Europe's best interests. There needs to be a radical change in econmics and social relations (within and between countries. The more we and countries like ours consume the less there is for others).
I am sorry to say this..I really am..BUT THE WORLD ALSO NEEDS LESS HUMANS..AND IF THESE PEOPLE CANNOT STOP MATING, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE NO FOOD, NO WATER AND NO HOPE..THEN MY "EMPATHY METER" IS PRETTY LOW FOR THEM...
Again, I am sorry to say this...I don't want people to suffer...but NATURE is suffering under the weight of us..Humans...and if these people cannot change their lives, cannot stop reproducing even long enough to get the resources to a level sufficiant to support more Humans..then..why HELP them to continue to increase their numbers to unsustainable levels? WHY?
Of course, yeah, I KNOW how unfair it is that we in the 'West' have it good etc..etc..but if you think that, then I have news for you..take your next vacation in Apalachia, or the Ozarks, or many..MANY rural areas in this country..or even URBAN DETROIT....
LASTLY, IT IS TIME FOR AMERICA TO LEAD THE WAY OF INDUSTRIAL NATIONS BY GRANTING TAX INCENTIVES FOR NO REPRODUCTION, IF A COUPLE IS MARRIED, OR SOME OTHER FORM OF LEGAL COMMITMENT..THEN THEY SHOULD BE GIVEN INCENTIVES TO NOT PLACE FURTHER BURDENS ON THE PLANET..HOW MUCH MATERIAL IS SAVED...WATER, FOOD, OIL...BY NOT ADDING ANOTHER HUMAN TO THE WORLD? I WANT THE SAME OR BETTER TAX "BREAKS" FOR CHILDLESS COUPLES AS THEY GIVE TO THE GODDAMN BREEDERS...ALL THESE PEOPLE CHURNING OUT HUMANS...ARE THEY INSANE?..ARE YOU?
I DON'T PAY FOR THIS..BUT YOU DO..
LESS HUMANS IS THE ONLY ANSWER THAT IS GOING TO WORK..LESS HUMANS..LESS HUMANS..LESS HUMANS..PERIOD!
jcrumb, first off, the caps don't emphasize your point any.
The world does need less people but the industrialized countries also need to consume far less resources. There is a finite amount of resources in the world and people in countries like the US consume five to six times more resources than people in the industrialized countries. If we don't change our consumption habits no on in the developing world is going to listen to our advice. You're telling THEM to sacrifice and change their lifestyle and aren't willing yourself, in a relatively far better position to begin with, to change a darn thing.
The economist Herman Daly that I linked above said another obvious truth (one of which you're addressing). Overall consumption is far too high and needs to decrease, which means countries like the US need to radically change their economic system and consumption habits. Countries in the developing countries need to reproduce far less as well, which will allow more per capita food availability. Both less people and less per capita consumption overall (with a decrease in per capita consumption in countries like ours outweighing the increase in the poorer countries) is needed, not just less people. On issue will be religious dogma, which needs to be confronted. How, I don't know.
Since they have the rapture or an equivalent, they have an excuse ready to not change.
Greetings. Please note that this is a food crisis, not a food shortage.
This crisis is being exacerbated by me, Big_Money, and I'm going to tell you how. See, I have billions of dollars invested in CDO's and SIV's and such - but the assets underlying these investments are of uncertain value, therefore I cannot "sell" them on the "market". Thankfully, the governments and the central banks are willing to let me use this toxic paper as collateral on loans. I can borrow what these things "should" be worth, and invest that money wherever I like in an attempt to make some money and pay back the loan.
So I invested in Food. And so did my friends. We have hundreds of billions of dollars of hot, anxious money bidding up the price of every ear of corn, every cow, every stalk of wheat. It's our right to try to make money. Billions of hungry people be darned. Let them eat CDO's.
"The Prime Minister said that food shortages represented a crisis on a par with the global turmoil in the financial markets, and threatened the stability of nations."
1) THERE IS NO "FOOD SHORTAGE"
2,100.000.000 tons of grain were produced in 2007, less than half of it (directly) feeds people, 47% are consumed by pigs, poultry and cattle... - to get 1 meat calorie, on average 7 plant calories are needed (depending on the type of animal)so eating less meat is a great contribution to global food security and personal and environmental health - ...
about 5% are wasted in the production of ethanol ("bio-fuel is a total misnomer, there is nothing biological about it...)- which - though a stupid idea - is hardly the main reason for rising food prices.
2) WHY ARE 850 MILLION PEOPLE MALNOURISHED WHEN AGROCULTURAL PRODUCTION HAS CONSTANTLY INCREASED?
The latest report of the IAASTD confirms earlier studies by the FAO and others: The real problems lie in the global system of food production, food processing and trade. Poor countries have been forced (by IMF and Word Bank policies)to grow "Cash Crops" like cotton, coffee or soy in order to generate export revenue - but not for the benefit of their own people. In most cases more than 50% of export earnings are lost on paying interest for international "development" loans....
Industrial agriculture (rightly defined as "a war against ecosystems" by Vandana Shiva)is totally unsuitable for "developing" countries: it is capital- and energy-intensive and even more environmentally destructive in sensitive climate zones. The corporatization of agriculture is destroying local farmers and markets (in India more than 150 thousand heavily indebted farmers have committed suicide with some help from Monsanto...)aided by the heavy subsidies for US and European farmers and the WTO "agreements" to open markets but get nothing in return....
Many countries fall into the "export trap": they depend heavily on a few or even one export crop: e.g. cotton producers: although the export volume increased by 40% in the last 15 yrs, income declined by 4% due to falling world market prices, coffee was even worse. The beauty of the system lies in the fact that farmers are told to increase productivity (more expenses for agrochemicals, this is called "development")and output but this will of course drive down the prices even more so the big food processors can always buy raw materials cheap and sell the refined (and often unhealthy) product with great profit to the consumer..
3)FINANCIAL MARKETS AND FOOD AS A COMMODITY
In a sane world the deregulation of financial markets would not have happened after the painful experiences of 1929... but since the neoliberal takeover in the 1980ies reason was replaced with fundamentalist ideology and "regulatory relief" was supposed to generate prosperity for all...
In fact, it was just helping the "needy" Wall Street people and their poor clients to reap even more more profits with "innovative financial instruments" like subprime loans, CDOs or heavily engineered "expiration prices" of futures...
If the Ponzi schemes failed, they could always rely on the government to bail them out (N.B. corporate welfare is ok, only social welfare is a sin...)especially after they suceeded in linking pension funds with the capital market...
That today more than 90% of capital is invested in these "virtual markets" and only 10% in the real economy is bad enough (talk about creating a bubble...) but unregulated speculating - with futures and options to drive down (for the farmer) resp. drive up (for the investor / broker) food prices - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/28/business/28commodities.html
http://www.mynews.in/fullstory.aspx?passfrom=enterprisestory&storyid=4052
and consequently with the livelihoods of millions of farmers and low-income consumers is really a sin and a crime. This madness must be stopped.
They told us that government is bad and has to be curtailed but now we are ruled by the economy, by financial markets and by corporations who determine the global rules of production and distribution, where demands for social justice, fairness, stability, respect for the environment and self-determination (e.g. of agricultural policy)are called "trade-barriers"...
Even now when an environmental catastrophe is imminent, our politicians cling to their deadly ideology of eternal "growth"and that "markets" will be fine, if left alone...
Einstein said it all: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former......
Yeah, let the market go free, when enough people die that there are no more customers for those commodities that bubble will burst too. But, I don't think they are going to go quietly.
Do we already have a tariff on mud pies ?
my 2Cents in a mini poem
People are starving so you can be rich
Go drive your hummer into a ditch
Your portfolio profits unearned, that's my pitch
Now spread it around you son of a bitch…
The Food Crisis: Global Markets and Deregulation Strike Again
Posted April 18th, 2008
by Gretchen Gordon
You wouldn't know it by watching Congressional debate on C-SPAN, but if you turn on the news, it's clear that the global food system is in crisis. Food prices globally have skyrocketed, in some cases 80%. Food protests and riots from Italy to Yemen have begun capturing worldwide attention, and policymakers are scrambling to point fingers at a litany of culprits—everything from climate change, high oil prices, a weak dollar and the biofuels boom, to meat eaters in China. All of these factors have played a part in the current crisis, but the blame game is also allowing one culprit—the principle protagonist in this story—to get away with not even a mention. It's a character you might have heard of recently for its role in that little unfortunate sub-prime mortgage mess. That's right, deregulation.
Pundits have spent a fair amount of air time describing the deregulated financial markets that sparked the mortgage crisis. But the regulatory state of global agricultural markets is something most policymakers, let alone
consumers, haven't given much of a thought. In many ways the dynamics at play are similar: global markets, deregulation and speculative capital don't mix well. However, in two key regards, these markets differ substantially: the scale of deregulation, and the scale of consequences.
More here:
http://www.foodfirst.org/en/node/2099
There was a cool story here in the last couple of days about a butter shortage in Japan. And some of commentators commentated on something that happened in the "markets" in Japan that helped bring this about. Rather than re-iterate the mechanism, I'd like to describe how it could help turn the food "crisis" into a food shortage.
With food prices soaring, lots of savvy entrepreneurial types are snapping up bits of land on which to make food. Now that the prices have tripled all of a sudden, it's easy to make a profit! Until next year. The sudden increase in supply will cause a glut come next harvest. (Proponents of the overpopulation theory will have a hard time with this). The glut will cause prices to drop. Plummet. Crater. Crash. Farmers will go bankrupt en masse, being unable to sell their goods at anything like a reasonable price. Farms will be abandoned. Governments will try to fix the problem by paying farmers to produce less food. Production will drop. (Proponents of the overpopulation theory will be back in their stride). Voila! Shortage, not just crisis.
So, Wall Street pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into jacking up the prices of stuff billions of people need to survive is indeed worse than most people have yet come to imagine. Well, except the proponents of overpopulation theory...
They grow tons of rice in central California. If the U.S. government was willing to cover the costs, the farmers could ship the rice to where ever it is needed.
Bush has not gotten out in front on any issue except oil and war. It is about time that we had a President that takes care of the people and actually cares about something beside his rich oil buddies.
WFT says:
"Repeat after me: Overpopulation. Overpopulation. Overpopulation. Overpopulation"
(not quiet correct, there is sufficient food, maybe its waste, waste, waste, and distibution, distribution, distribution, read up on biofuels etc.)
HOWEVER THERE IS A SOLUTION, SOLUTION, SOLUTION, which is Education, Education, Education.
Research shows educated people have fewer children and are more likely to be able to generate income to buy food.
Too much money is spent on wars and too little on education.
Re-regulation of markets seems to be the consensus solution but the regulatory agencies are themselves weak links that may be broken like what happened already. We need regulation that can weather the capitalist assaults. The answer is self-regulating markets. Truly self-regulating markets are one of the many progressive results of a high quality civics curriculum. It's a special curriculum that teaches kids from K thru 12 how to engage in their societies for the benefit of people/planet. One of the key lessons is that all people must demand, get, and keep land, water, and food self-sufficiency and security. This means small land plots for small farmers producing sustainably for the local market. These markets are self-regulating because nobody has enough power (luxury) to cause large-scale destruction.
Now the capitalists were not just intoxicated with market free for all. They had a strategy. They wanted to build a global marketplace where each country produced their specialty for the global market. So the capitalists fanned out and told everybody their plan. You can grow cotton cuz your climate is best for that. You export your cotton and import all the foods you need. Someone else will grow the rubber, someone else the coffee, etc. Oh so much fun, big kids playing with a global erector set. But it's not just for fun, it's for profit, and the kids look forward to owning entire countries one day. To put an end to this, let's "enlighten the people", "teach them to fish", K-12 civics curriculum.
Minitru, Good one.
I think if we just dramatically increase the number of children produced, we could speed it up and get the suffering over with even sooner. What we need is more consumers! (But let's not talk about that.)
TROJAN, THE MAKER OF YOUR FAVORITE CONDOM,HAS SEEN THEIR STOCK EXPAND DRAMATICALLY IN THE FIRST QUARTER AND EXPECT SECOND QUARTER PROFITS TO GO THROUGH THE ROOF.
THE FELLOWS (SPECULATORS) ON WALL STREET GOT EXCITED WHEN THEY FIGURED OUT THAT THE WORLD POPULATION COULD NOT AFFORD THE FUEL AND FOOD PRICES THAT THAT THEY HAVE HELPED TO DRIVE UP WITH THEIR FUTERS SPECULATION,
SO TO COVER THEIR ASSES THEY SAW THE RUBBER SECTOR AS ANOTHER PLACE TO MAKE BIG BUCKS.
THEY CONCLUDED CORRECTLY THAT THE MIDDLE CLASS JUST CAN'T AFFORD TO FEED ANOTHER MOUTH OR THE GAS TO TAKE JUNIOR TO THE LITTLE LEAGUE PRACTICE.
BUT, ON REFLECTION, WALL STREET REALLY ISN'T INTERESTED IN MAKING MONEY IN THE "LONG" RUN ON ANOTHER BASIC NEED OF YOUR NEIGHBOR
THEY ARE SMART. THEY KNOW WITH FEWER ON THE PLANET THERE WOULD BE LESS DEMAND FOR FOOD AND FUEL WHERE THEIR BIG MONEY IS.
THE LAST THING SPECULATORS WANT TO SEE IS ANOTHER BUBBLE BURST(REAL ESTATE)
IN THE FUEL AND FOOD SECTORS.
SO IN REALITY THEY WISH TO SEE THE TROJAN BUBBLE BURST.WHICH IT WILL EVENTUALLY BUT THEY WISH TO MAKE MONEY HERE WHILE THEY CAN.
THEY KNOW WHEN TO PULL OUT OF A STOCK BEFORE IT HEADS SOUTH.
THERE IS ALSO A RUMOR THE VATICAN HAS A PLAN IN THE WORKS TO BUY THE RUBBER COMPANIES AND THEN RESTRUCTURE THEM INTO MAKERS OF CROSSES ONLY.
THIS LEADS TO THE IDEA THAT WALL STREET AND THE VATICAN ARE IN THIS TOGETHER
PREDICTION; SAMS CLUB AND COSTCO WILL EVENTUALLY LIMIT SALES OF TROJANS TO ONE PACK PER YEAR PER FAMILY. THIS OF COURSE WILL MAKE ALL STAKE HOLDERS HAPPY
EXCEPT YOU, MR AND MRS MIDDLE CLASS
This from the Oakland Institute published in several newspapers across the country on April 17. Check out their website at www.oaklandinstitute.org
Prevent Food Riots by Changing Policies
Food riots are erupting all over the world. To prevent them and to help people afford the most basic of goods, we need to understand the causes of skyrocketing food prices and correct the policies that have fueled them.
World food prices rose by 39 percent in the last year. Rice alone rose to a 19-year high in March – an increase of 50 per cent in two weeks alone – while the real price of wheat has hit a 28-year high.
As a result, food riots erupted in Egypt, Guinea, Haiti, Indonesia, Mauritania, Mexico, Senegal, Uzbekistan and Yemen. For the 3 billion people in the world who subsist on $2 a day or less, the leap in food prices is a killer. They spend a majority of their income on food, and when the price goes up, they can't afford to feed themselves or their families.
Analysts have pointed to some obvious causes, such as increased demand from China and India, whose economies are booming. Rising fuel and fertilizer costs, increased use of bio-fuels and climate change have all played a part.
But less obvious causes have also had a profound effect on food prices.
Over the last few decades, the United States, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have used their leverage to impose devastating policies on developing countries. By requiring countries to open up their agriculture market to giant multinational companies, by insisting that countries dismantle their marketing boards and by persuading them to specialize in exportable cash crops such as coffee, cocoa, cotton and even flowers, they have driven the poorest countries into a downward spiral.
In the last thirty years, developing countries that used to be self-sufficient in food have turned into large food importers. Dismantling of marketing boards that kept commodities in a rolling stock to be released in event of a bad harvest, thus protecting both producers and consumers against sharp rises or drops in prices, has further worsened the situation.
Here's what we must do to prevent an epidemic of starvation from breaking out.
First, it is essential to have safety nets and public distribution systems put in place. Donor countries should provide more aid immediately to support government efforts in poor countries and respond to appeals from U.N. agencies, which are desperately seeking $500 million by May 1.
Second, we should help affected countries develop their agricultural sectors to feed more of their own people and decrease their dependence on food imports. We should promote production and consumption of local crops raised by small, sustainable farms instead of growing cash crops for western markets. And we should support a country's effort to manage stocks and pricing so as to limit the volatility of food prices.
To embrace these crucial policies, however, we need to stop worshipping the golden calf of the so-called free market and embrace, instead, the principle of food sovereignty. Every country and every people have a right to food that is affordable. When the market deprives them of this, it is the market that has to give.
* Anuradha Mittal is the Executive Director of the Oakland Institute, a policy think tank whose mission is to increase public participation and promote fair debate on critical social, economic, environmental and foreign policy issues.
rtDrury, Do you have a source for an informed curriculum? Small countries are being portioned out among their current crops of greedy politicians(for sale to foreign interests); and, the populace seem helpless to prevent the loss of their own water, land, food, and labor.
This article has attracted such helpful and informed comments. Thanks all, esp. minitru. I believe that the neocons and neolib marketeers are quite willing to let this happen ala Naomi Klein scenario. However, there are other nations in the world in Europe, South America etc. who are concerned and may have some proposals for immediate relief and long term solutions. Does anyone know what measures are being proposed and by whom?
In addition to the brutish privatization and speculative approach toward every natural thing, I do believe that the world human population is reaching an insupportable level. Better management can distribute the food and water supply, but the build up of waste products is killing us too. I agree that education, family planning help, health care for children and a prospect of a good job for both women and men will result in fewer children.
We have been going more and more vegetarian, but this article and your comments have convinced me to stop eating meat. I propose a meat boycott in solidarity with the people in the world who have nothing.
It is not population, pupulation, population; it is CAPITALISM, CAPITALISM, CAPITALISM!
...
What I find so unfortunate is how this food crisis is largely a result of a decade-long retreat from nearly a decade of progress on raising awareness of the vile effects of the global capitalist trade regime.
There were hundreds of thousands of Naomi Kleins - in Seattle, DC, Quebe, Goteborg, Genoa - but then came the Bush catastrophe. It is as if a big converence had convened to resolve the greatest questions of humanity - only to have the building catch fire and burn to the ground.
Under next regime we must re-organize - and we should be under no illusons that Obama will not throw all his power against us just as Bill Clinton did.
Everyone here seems to already 'Get It'. It's not about a food storage, it's about Speculation, wealthy people forcing the prices up for their own beneifit, which pushes the price of food out of reach of the poor, and the Aid org. trying to help them!
It's another Speculative Bubble, just like Oil and Housing!
OVERPOPULATION IS THE CAUSE OF THE FOOD CRISES?
Could this be a politically motivated myth like "weapons of mass destrution"?
Granted, current estimated world population is 6,65 billion, but the worst famines and food crises occurred before 1900 when world population was less than 1,6 billion.
"Three of the worst famines (food shortages) in history were the Great Famine of Bengal, India, that took place in 1769; the Great Irish Famine that began in 1845; and the Chinese famine of 1878. During the Great Famine of Bengal a total of 10,000,000 people died of starvation", see
http://www.enotes.com/history-fact-finder/natural-man-made-disasters/what-were-worst-famines-history
Maybe the "overpopulation" school of thought should come clean on who their political masters are.